Minor Dialogues, Together With the Dialogue on Clemency
is unapt to obtain it: being over hasty and frantic, like almost
all desires, it hinders itself in the attainment of its own object,
and therefore has never been useful either in peace or war: for it
makes peace like war, and when in arms forgets that Mars belongs
{63} to neither side, and falls into the power of the enemy, because
it is not in its own. In the next place, vices ought not to be
received into common use because on some occasions they have effected
somewhat: for so also fevers are good for certain kinds of ill-health,
but nevertheless it is better to be altogether free from them: it
is a hateful mode of cure to owe one’s health to disease. Similarly,
although anger, like poison, or falling headlong, or being shipwrecked,
may have unexpectedly done good, yet it ought not on that account
to be classed as wholesome, for poisons have often proved good for
the health.
XIII. Moreover, qualities which we ought to possess become better
and more desirable the more extensive they are: if justice is a
good thing, no one will say that it would be better if any part
were subtracted from it; if bravery is a good thing, no one would
wish it to be in any way curtailed: consequently the greater anger
is, the better it is, for who ever objected to a good thing being
increased? But it is not expedient that anger should be increased:
therefore it is not expedient that it should exist at all, for that
which grows bad by increase cannot be a good thing. “Anger is
useful,” says our adversary, “because it makes men more ready to
fight.” According to that mode of reasoning, then, drunkenness also
is a good thing, for it makes men insolent and daring, and many use
their weapons better when the worse for liquor: nay, according to
that reasoning, also, you may call frenzy and madness essential to
strength, because madness often makes men stronger. Why, does not
fear often by the rule of contraries make men bolder, and does not
the terror of death rouse up even arrant cowards to join battle?
Yet anger, drunkenness, fear, and the like, are base and temporary
incitements to action, and can furnish no arms to virtue, which has
no need of vices, although they may at times be of some little
assistance to sluggish and cowardly minds. {64} No man becomes
braver through anger, except one who without anger would not have
been brave at all: anger does not therefore come to assist courage,
but to take its place. What are we to say to the argument that, if
anger were a good thing it would attach itself to all the best men?
Yet the most irascible of creatures are infants, old men, and sick
people. Every weakling is naturally prone to complaint.
XIV. It is impossible, says Theophrastus, for a good man not to be
angry with bad men. By this reasoning, the better a man is, the
more irascible he will be: yet will he not rather be more tranquil,
more free from passions, and hating no one: indeed, what reason has
he for hating sinners, since it is error that leads them into such
crimes? now it does not become a sensible man to hate the erring,
since if so he will hate himself: let him think how many things he
does contrary to good morals, how much of what he has done stands
in need of pardon, and he will soon become angry with himself also,
for no righteous judge pronounces a different judgment in his own
case and in that of others. No one, I affirm, will be found who can
acquit himself. Every one when he calls himself innocent looks
rather to external witnesses than to his own conscience. How much
more philanthropic it is to deal with the erring in a gentle and
fatherly spirit, and to call them into the right course instead of
hunting them down? When a man is wandering about our fields because
he has lost his way, it is better to place him on the right path
than to drive him away.
XV. The sinner ought, therefore, to be corrected both by warning
and by force, both by gentle and harsh means, and may be made a
better man both towards himself and others by chastisement, but not
by anger: for who is angry with the patient whose wounds he is
tending? “But they cannot be corrected, and there is nothing in
them that is {65} gentle or that admits of good hope.” Then let
them be removed from mortal society, if they are likely to deprave
every one with whom they come in contact, and let them cease to be
bad men in the only way in which they can: yet let this be done
without hatred: for what reason have I for hating the man to whom
I am doing the greatest good, since I am rescuing him from himself?
Does a man hate his own limbs when he cuts them off? That is not
an act of anger, but a lamentable method of healing. We knock mad
dogs on the head, we slaughter fierce and savage bulls, and we doom
scabby sheep to the knife, lest they should infect our flocks: we
destroy monstrous births, and we also drown our children if they
are born weakly or unnaturally formed; to separate what is useless
from what is sound is an act, not of anger, but of reason. Nothing
becomes one who inflicts punishment less than anger, because the
punishment has all the more power to work reformation if the sentence
be pronounced with deliberate judgment. This is why Socrates said
to the slave, “I would strike you, were I not angry.” He put off
the correction of the slave to a calmer season; at the moment, he
corrected himself. Who can boast that he has his passions, under
control, when Socrates did not dare to trust himself to his anger?
XVI. We do not, therefore, need an angry chastiser to punish the
erring and wicked: for since anger is a crime of the mind, it is
not right that sins should be punished by sin. “What! am I not to
be angry with a robber, or a poisoner?” No: for I am not angry with
myself when I bleed myself. I apply all kinds of punishment as
remedies. You are as yet only in the first stage of error, and do
not go wrong seriously, although you do so often: then I will try
to amend you by a reprimand given first in private and then in
public.[4] You, again, have gone {66} too far to be restored to
virtue by words alone; you must be kept in order by disgrace. For
the next, some stronger measure is required, something that he can
feel must be branded upon him; you, sir, shall be sent into exile
and to a desert place. The next man’s thorough villany needs harsher
remedies: chains and public imprisonment must be applied to him.
You, lastly, have an incurably vicious mind, and add crime to crime:
you have come to such a pass, that you are not influenced by the
arguments which are never wanting to recommend evil, but sin itself
is to you a sufficient reason for sinning: you have so steeped your
whole heart in wickedness, that wickedness cannot be taken from you
without bringing your heart with it. Wretched man! you have long
sought to die; we will do you good service, we will take away that
madness from which you suffer, and to you who have so long lived a
misery to yourself and to others, we will give the only good thing
which remains, that is, death. Why should I be angry with a man
just when I am doing him good: sometimes the truest form of compassion
is to put a man to death. If I were a skilled and learned physician,
and were to enter a hospital, or a rich[5] man’s house, I should
not have prescribed the same treatment for all the patients who
were suffering from various diseases. I see different kinds of vice
in the vast number of different minds, and am called in to heal the
whole body of citizens: let us seek for the remedies proper for
each disease. This man may be cured by his own sense of honour,
that one by travel, that one by pain, that one by want, that one
by the sword. If, therefore, it becomes my duty as a magistrate to
put on black[6] robes, and summon an assembly by the sound of a
{67} trumpet,[7] I shall walk to the seat of judgment not in a rage
or in a hostile spirit, but with the countenance of a judge; I shall
pronounce the formal sentence in a grave and gentle rather than a
furious voice, and shall bid them proceed {68} sternly, yet not
angrily. Even when I command a criminal to be beheaded, when I sew
a parricide up in a sack, when I send a man to be punished by
military law, when I fling a traitor or public enemy down the
Tarpeian Rock, I shall be free from anger, and shall look and feel
just as though I were crushing snakes and other venomous creatures.
“Anger is necessary to enable us to punish.” What? do you think
that the law is angry with men whom it does not know, whom it has
never seen, who it hopes will never exist? We ought, therefore, to
adopt the law’s frame of mind, which does not become angry, but
merely defines offences: for, if it is right for a good man to be
angry at wicked crimes, it will also be right for him to be moved
with envy at the prosperity of wicked men: what, indeed, is more
scandalous than that in some cases the very men, for whose deserts
no fortune could be found bad enough, should flourish and actually
be the spoiled children of success? Yet he will see their affluence
without envy, just as he sees their crimes without anger: a good
judge condemns wrongful acts, but does not hate them. “What then?
when the wise man is dealing with something of this kind, will his
mind not be affected by it and become excited beyond its usual
wont?” I admit that it will: he will experience a slight and trifling
emotion; for, as Zeno says, “Even in the mind of the wise man, a
scar remains after the wound is quite healed.” He will, therefore,
feel certain hints and semblances of passions; but he will be free
from the passions themselves.
XVII. Aristotle says that “certain passions, if one makes a proper
use of them, act as arms”: which would be true if, like weapons of
war, they could be taken up or laid aside at the pleasure of their
wielder. These arms, which Aristotle assigns to virtue, fight of
their own accord, do not wait to be seized by the hand, and possess
a man instead of being possessed by him. We have no need of {69}
external weapons, nature has equipped us sufficiently by giving us
reason. She has bestowed this weapon upon us, which is strong,
imperishable, and obedient to our will, not uncertain or capable
of being turned against its master. Reason suffices by itself not
merely to take thought for the future, but to manage our affairs:[8]
what, then, can be more foolish than for reason to beg anger for
protection, that is, for what is certain to beg of what is uncertain?
what is trustworthy of what is faithless? what is whole of what is
sick? What, indeed? since reason is far more powerful by itself
even in performing those operations in which the help of anger seems
especially needful: for when reason has decided that a particular
thing should be done, she perseveres in doing it; not being able
to find anything better than herself to exchange with. She, therefore,
abides by her purpose when it has once been formed; whereas anger
is often overcome by pity: for it possesses no firm strength, but
merely swells like an empty bladder, and makes a violent beginning,
just like the winds which rise from the earth and are caused by
rivers and marshes, which blow furiously without any continuance:
anger begins with a mighty rush, and then falls away, becoming
fatigued too soon: that which but lately thought of nothing but
cruelty and novel forms of torture, is become quite softened and
gentle when the time comes for punishment to be inflicted. Passion
soon cools, whereas reason is always consistent: yet even in cases
where anger has continued to burn, it often happens that although
there may be many who deserve to die, yet after the death of two
or three it ceases to slay. Its first onset is fierce, just as the
teeth of snakes when first roused from their lair are venomous, but